So we knew that mad cow disease was in cattle but we didn't know whether or not mad cow disease had also infected sheep. And the government of the time was very nervous about us even mentioning that. But I took the view, it's better to treat people as adults and say, "Look, there could be this risk." And we thought a lot about how we'd express this idea of there might be a risk but we don't know, and then what we did there was to say, "There could be a risk, we simply don't know at the moment. We're not advising you to stop eating lamb, but if you want to that's up to you, but we are on the case and we're doing research to find out the answer and we will get back to you very soon." That in a way he was trying to treat the population as an adult group who would understand risk and uncertainty. That in itself was a risky approach but I think it worked. The best answer is, "We simply don't know but we're onto the case." Sometimes you've got to recognize that people's perception of risk diverges from the pure science, GMOs, and sometimes you're communicating, "There could be a risk. It's small but we don't necessarily want you to do anything different about it."